Barkley: I'm better than Malone

[ShaqAttack3234]

aquiring a better player for a worse one will definately benefit your team. lets say stockton was the sixers starting point guard and cheeks and barkley weren't there and someone of equal value of cheeks was in barkley's spot. jack sikma for example. that would make the sixers best 5:
C Mike Gminski (16.9ppg, 10.5rpg, 1.8apg, 0.8spg, 1.8bpg)
PF Jack Sikma (16.5ppg, 8.6rpg, 3.4apg, 1.1spg, 1.0bpg)
SF Cliff Robinson (19.0ppg, 6.5rpg, 2.1apg, 1.3spg, 0.6bpg)
SG Gerald Henderson/David Wingate
PG John Stockton (14.7ppg, 2.9rpg, 13.8apg, 3.0spg)

now tell me this team would not win any more than 36 games i could see them easily making atleast fifth seed and possibly making the conference semifinals.

Who is going to score on that team? Acquiring a better player than Barkley in '88 would help, unfortunately there were only 4 of them. Larry Bird, Michael Jordan, Magic Johnson and Hakeem Olajuwon.

barkley was at his defensive peak in 1986. in the limited energy he had he was able to spread it over both ends of the court, unlike later on in his career when he began to rest on defense. he was the best player on a 54 win team that was eventually eliminated to the higher seed milwaukee bucks in 7 games. barkley, for once, played exceptionally well in the playoffs while the sixers were without their number 1 scorer and top 4 center in moses malone throughout the playoffs. barkley recorded what would be his highest averages in his playoff career for rebounds and assists. and ended up with averages of 25.0ppg, 15.8rpg, 5.6apg, 2.3spg, and 1.3bpg.

Barkley was never a consistent game changer defensively anyway.

I do know that Barkley's only prime year averaging less than 25 ppg was 23 ppg in '92 while he averaged an even 20 ppg in '86. I also know that Barkley never averaged over 4 turnovers in his prime while he averaged 4.4 in '86. And aside from '88, he never averaged more turnovers than assists in his prime, while he averaged 0.5 more TO in '86. And you could argue that his prime was more '89-'93 anyway.

ask scottie pippen. barkley not playing defense because he wanted to conserve energy for offense is selfish personified.

It's actually common for stars who are expected to carry the team offensively and play with limited talent. I remember the Scottie Pippen comments, that shit was hyped to no end, but why is that you disregard Pippen's opinion when it comes to his best season, but now cite his quote about Barkley?

if dantley was a star then there were about 70 stars in the nba at that point. in any case the difference between thomas and the rest of the pistons was obvious in terms of star power..about as obvious as it was between magic and the rest of the lakers.

I'm no Dantley fan, but you think he wasn't even top 50? Supporting casts aren't all about star power. How many championship teams, or even finals teams since then can you name that relied on a star less than Detroit?

in a team with that many people among the top at their position they should win regardless of rookies.

You can blame Moses for dropping from 24.6 ppg and 13.1 rpg on 46.9% shooting in the season to 18.2 ppg and 13.4 rpg on 40.5% shooting. Moses was the guy to blame for a Sixer team with probably the most talented team in the East, if not the league only managing 1 win vs a Celtic team with Bird limited by injuries and only averaging 20.8 ppg, 7.2 rpg and 6 apg on 41.9% shooting compared to his season averages of 28.7 ppg, 10.5 rpg and 6.6 apg on 52.2% in the season.

After all, Moses was the same leader of the '84 Sixers who not only failed to get back to the finals after being one of the greatest teams ever the previous year, but were upset in the 1st round with the most talented team in the East.

you are not old for basketball when you are top 2 in your position in the entire world. and his averages dipped from 19/14/5 and 48%fg to 18/12/3 and 43%

34 is old for this sport. A player's prime usually ends between 30-32 years old.

because the isiah thomas led pistons made them look pedestrian

Everyone thought Jordan's cast looked pedestrian.

detroid beat them because the isiah thomas led pistons made them look pedestrian

Isiah had nothing to do with arguably the game's greatest player shooting 35%. Bird did play well from an all around standpoint, rebounded and passed extremely well as usual and both his individual defense on Dantley and help defense were very good. But he was also missing many shots he usually makes, and also rushing some shots and take a few uncharacteristic shots. He was just off, and it's tough to win when you get 30 ppg on 53/41/92 shooting for the season, and he drops 10 ppg and down to 35%.

the celtics had the better starting 5 and the best record in the conference

Pistons were more complete.

grant was definately bordering on superstar level in 1992. alot of these so called "superstars" would have to have their numbers drastically decrease to be able to fit in with chicago's schemes and not discrupt chemistry.

nance was better in the regular season and playoffs than both daugherty and price.

you obviously underrated horace grant and bj armstrong then

Nah, BJ was a good shooter, and Grant was a very good all around power forward who teams would love to have as their 3rd best player.

it was very fortunate that grant could sustain his play from the previous season, bj could show that massive improvement, and they could add a talented youngster such as kukoc along with nice role players such as longley and myers.

They were very fortunate that Pippen could raise his game to help a team with limited talent overachieve. They were very fortunate that Pippen was the best perimeter defender, became a better scorer and rebounder that season and was also such a smart player and good playmaker who knew the triangle offense so well. Because they had to rely on the triangle more with their limited offensive talent.

the losses were all against powerful outfits, only 1 came against a sub .500 team and that was on the road.

Still a pretty small sample size to call them a good team.Pippen still kept them above .500 without Grant in both the '94 season for the stretch he was out, and the entire '95 season even before Jordan came back when grant was in Orlando. And the Bulls without Grant or Jordan were very limited with huge flaws.

c'mon the greatest scorer in nba history up and leaves and the best you can do is average 3 more points? as the second best player on the team he definately should have stepped up and scored atleast 25ppg on that roster that was so desperate for offense.

Pippen wasn't really a 25 ppg scorer. That wasn't his game, that wasn't what made Pippen one of the great all around players. They overachieved as much as you could expect.

the bulls not only were alot more dominant in '91, they also faced tougher competition, and pippen was more productive. pippen also got better as the bulls progressed throughout, and asserted himself alot more.

'91 Knicks and '92 Hear are virtually even. The '92 Knicks were much better than the '91 Sixers. The '91 Pistons with a healthy Isiah may have been better than the '92 Cavs, but because Isiah wasn't healthy, I'm going with the Cavs team that won 7 more games. And a healthy '91 Lakers were better, but with Worthy's injured from the WCF and Scott's injury, Portland was at least as tough, if not tougher in '92.

they only put up tougher fights because the bulls were less dominant, jordan wasn't as good, and pippen wasn't as good.

No, Jordan was virtually the same player and played basically the same in the 3 seasons from '90-'92, and very close in '93. Pippen improved noticeably each year from '90-'92, same with Grant. Cartwright and Paxson fell off a bit, but Armstrong improved.

The Bulls went 67-15 and were not only more comfortable in the triangle from te start having played 2 years in it and Pippen having assumed the point forward role from the start making them an even better offensive team, but they stepped up their defense too. Pippen and especially Grant got better at that end, and Jordan had arguably his best defensive season in '92.

robinson made johnson. johnson was a journeyman until he ended up in san antonio. nobody wanted him. even the spurs didn't want him. they let him walk to the golden state warriors in 1993, then he came crying back in 1994 once he realised he sucked, and he would never see another nba paycheck if he didn't jump on robinson's coattails again.

Yeah, Robinson walks on water, he turns water into wine.

oh yeh..another valuable piece..so valuable infact that they traded him for freakin will perdue in the offseason and only lost 3 more games. will freakin perdue.

Look at their record in '95 when he was out compared to when he played, they lost 2 more games in 16 fewer games without him, and you're diminshing his imapct? And what about Person?

That's quite a few quality players, Del Negro was also a nice role player for your 6th best player or whatever.

antoine carr and his 5.5 rebounds per game in 27 minutes was pretty good ellis is a one dimentional shooter..and the other guys are d-leaguers.

He still had 2 legitimate scoring options on the perimeter in Ellis and Elliott, in addition to a 3rd capable scoring option in Carr. How many scoring options does a team need? Ellis was one-dimensional, but he did that one thing extremely well. 17 ppg on 50% from the field and 40% on 3s as a 2nd/3rd option and 10th in made 3s is good.

[Shep]

Who is going to score on that team?

4 out of 5 guys were averaging 15 points. any one of the 4 could step up and score 25 on any given night.

Acquiring a better player than Barkley in '88 would help, unfortunately there were only 4 of them. Larry Bird, Michael Jordan, Magic Johnson and Hakeem Olajuwon.

you forgot the other 5 that were also better than barkley: john stockton, isiah thomas, fat lever, james worthy, and dominique wilkins.

Barkley was never a consistent game changer defensively anyway.

thats ok. i would rather him play better defense and put more effort like in '86 in than be lazy and not not care.

It's actually common for stars who are expected to carry the team offensively and play with limited talent. I remember the Scottie Pippen comments, that shit was hyped to no end, but why is that you disregard Pippen's opinion when it comes to his best season, but now cite his quote about Barkley?

easy. because players aren't good judges of who the best players are..whereas pippen had inside knowledge on the barkley situation in houston.

I'm no Dantley fan, but you think he wasn't even top 50? Supporting casts aren't all about star power. How many championship teams, or even finals teams since then can you name that relied on a star less than Detroit?

dantley was top 48. to have your third best player not even one of the best 47 players in the nba and to still make a game 7 of the nba finals speaks volumes about thomas

You can blame Moses for dropping from 24.6 ppg and 13.1 rpg on 46.9% shooting in the season to 18.2 ppg and 13.4 rpg on 40.5% shooting. Moses was the guy to blame for a Sixer team with probably the most talented team in the East, if not the league only managing 1 win vs a Celtic team with Bird limited by injuries and only averaging 20.8 ppg, 7.2 rpg and 6 apg on 41.9% shooting compared to his season averages of 28.7 ppg, 10.5 rpg and 6.6 apg on 52.2% in the season.

whoever dropped off in production isn't really the point here. the point is that barkley had alot of help in his career.

After all, Moses was the same leader of the '84 Sixers who not only failed to get back to the finals after being one of the greatest teams ever the previous year, but were upset in the 1st round with the most talented team in the East.

yeh, malone, like barkley was one of the most overrated players in nba history.

34 is old for this sport. A player's prime usually ends between 30-32 years old.

he was definately still in his prime, and top 2 at his position.

Everyone thought Jordan's cast looked pedestrian.

jordan and his cast were good enough for only 4 less wins in the regular season, and they ended up getting demolished by the pistons in 5.

Isiah had nothing to do with arguably the game's greatest player shooting 35%. Bird did play well from an all around standpoint, rebounded and passed extremely well as usual and both his individual defense on Dantley and help defense were very good. But he was also missing many shots he usually makes, and also rushing some shots and take a few uncharacteristic shots. He was just off, and it's tough to win when you get 30 ppg on 53/41/92 shooting for the season, and he drops 10 ppg and down to 35%.

arguably the games greates player? bird wasn't even top 2 in 1988. the celtics lost because the piston's best player outplayed the celtics best player. thomas averaged 23.0ppg, 5.2rpg, 8.3apg, and 2.7spg. besides, bird's scoring output and shooting percentages didn't even have much of an effect on the outcome of games. in the only 2 wins the celtics had against the pistons he averaged 19 points on 37%.

Pistons were more complete.

celtics better over 82 games

Nah, BJ was a good shooter, and Grant was a very good all around power forward who teams would love to have as their 3rd best player.

awesome, well rounded players who stepped up huge to pick up the slack with no mj. bj was an all-star, and grant a top 4 power forward.

They were very fortunate that Pippen could raise his game to help a team with limited talent overachieve. They were very fortunate that Pippen was the best perimeter defender, became a better scorer and rebounder that season and was also such a smart player and good playmaker who knew the triangle offense so well. Because they had to rely on the triangle more with their limited offensive talent.

pippen didn't raise his game at all. with the greatest scorer in the game leaving, the second best scorer on the team needed to elevate his scoring more than anything else.

Still a pretty small sample size to call them a good team.Pippen still kept them above .500 without Grant in both the '94 season for the stretch he was out, and the entire '95 season even before Jordan came back when grant was in Orlando. And the Bulls without Grant or Jordan were very limited with huge flaws.

how many good teams did they beat without grant in '94? you would imagine that bulls team in '95 to be around .500 anyway. especially with kukoc stepping up into a bigger role and averaging 16/5/5, along with bj's continued steady play.

Pippen wasn't really a 25 ppg scorer. That wasn't his game, that wasn't what made Pippen one of the great all around players. They overachieved as much as you could expect.

pippen needed to be a 25 ppg scorer. superstars do what the team requires, when they require it.

'91 Knicks and '92 Hear are virtually even. The '92 Knicks were much better than the '91 Sixers. The '91 Pistons with a healthy Isiah may have been better than the '92 Cavs, but because Isiah wasn't healthy, I'm going with the Cavs team that won 7 more games. And a healthy '91 Lakers were better, but with Worthy's injured from the WCF and Scott's injury, Portland was at least as tough, if not tougher in '92.

the knicks had a better regular season, weren't a expansion team playing in its first ever playoff series. the knicks had patrick ewing who had a great regular season with 27/11/3/1/3. the heat lost the regular season series to the bulls 0-4 and averaging losing margin was over 17 points per game.

the sixers were better than the knicks also. even tho the knicks won more games in the regular season, the sixers won 3 out of 4 regular season games against the bulls, whereas the knicks went a paltry 0-4 against the bulls in the '92 regular season.

the pistons were easily better than the cavs. they were the defending 2 time champion and the bulls bogey team..and to destroy them like they did..well nothing else really needs to be said here.

the lakers were also much better than the trailblazers coming off a decade of dominance and boasting the best point guard in the nba a top 3 small forward, a top 4 center, and a top 5 power forward.

No, Jordan was virtually the same player and played basically the same in the 3 seasons from '90-'92, and very close in '93. Pippen improved noticeably each year from '90-'92, same with Grant. Cartwright and Paxson fell off a bit, but Armstrong improved.

jordan was at his peak in '91 due to his playoff performance so that easily separated him from any other year. pippen was closer to his '91 self than jordan was, but still wasn't as good. the only player that was better in '92 was horace grant.

The Bulls went 67-15 and were not only more comfortable in the triangle from te start having played 2 years in it and Pippen having assumed the point forward role from the start making them an even better offensive team, but they stepped up their defense too. Pippen and especially Grant got better at that end, and Jordan had arguably his best defensive season in '92.

both jordan and pippen had the better regular season in 1992, but once again, the playoffs were the difference. the bulls lost only 1 games, and jordan and pippen both played amazing ball.

Yeah, Robinson walks on water, he turns water into wine.

Look at their record in '95 when he was out compared to when he played, they lost 2 more games in 16 fewer games without him, and you're diminshing his imapct? And what about Person?

That's quite a few quality players, Del Negro was also a nice role player for your 6th best player or whatever.

yeh what about their 12th best player julius nwosu in his 23 games was a nice impact player, he averaged 13 points and 10 rebounds per 36 minutes! why would you trade rodman for filth if he was of any worth to your team?

He still had 2 legitimate scoring options on the perimeter in Ellis and Elliott, in addition to a 3rd capable scoring option in Carr. How many scoring options does a team need? Ellis was one-dimensional, but he did that one thing extremely well. 17 ppg on 50% from the field and 40% on 3s as a 2nd/3rd option and 10th in made 3s is good.

oh ya, n don't forget about corey crowder and how well he played in his 7 games for the spurs.

[ShaqAttack3234]

4 out of 5 guys were averaging 15 points. any one of the 4 could step up and score 25 on any given night.

That Sixer team didn't have particularly good offensive players outside of Barkley.

you forgot the other 5 that were also better than barkley: john stockton, isiah thomas, fat lever, james worthy, and dominique wilkins.

thats ok. i would rather him play better defense and put more effort like in '86 in than be lazy and not not care.

And I'd rather have a far more skilled Barkley who wasn't a turnover machine.

easy. because players aren't good judges of who the best players are..whereas pippen had inside knowledge on the barkley situation in houston.

Some players are good judges of players, but Pippen is more qualified than anyone to judge what his best season was.

dantley was top 48. to have your third best player not even one of the best 47 players in the nba and to still make a game 7 of the nba finals speaks volumes about thomas

Teams have won titles with 3rd best players who weren't top 50. And I'm not sure Dantley was that low.

whoever dropped off in production isn't really the point here. the point is that barkley had alot of help in his career.

Not in his prime except '93. He did have good rosters in his first 2 years(though Moses was injured in '86), and Phoenix and Houston. Too bad they didn't come earlier when he was at the top of his game. look what happened in the one prime year that he had a legit contending team in, he got all the way to the finals.

yeh, malone, like barkley was one of the most overrated players in nba history.

Disagree on Barkley. Not sure if I'd call Moses overrated, at times I thought so, but he was the best player in the league for 2 years in '82 and '83. And he led one of the great teams of all time with a 65-17 record and a 12-1 playoff record. I definitely don't see why Moses gets into some top 10 lists. He was probably the biggest black hole I've seen. I was surprised to see him constantly hold the ball instead of passing when doubled, and then go to a drop step or something and force up a shot against 2 men. That's probably why he had such a horrible assist/turnover ratio. And he didn't seem to be the defensive anchor that the other great centers were considering Houston was often among the worst defensive teams and at times were the worst or 2nd worst. Outside of '81 and '83, his playoff career was disappointing too, and he underachieved with incredibly talented rosters in '84 and '85 including a 1st round upset loss in '84. He was one of the all-time great rebounders and a very good scorer, though. Regardless, outside of the first tier top 5 centers(Kareem, Russell, Shaq, Hakeem, Wilt), I often wonder if he was really a more effective center than some of the other great centers.

he was definately still in his prime, and top 2 at his position.

Now I've heard it all. Barkley was in his prime in Houston? He hadn't been in his prime since '93!

jordan and his cast were good enough for only 4 less wins in the regular season, and they ended up getting demolished by the pistons in 5.

This is useless, are you really claiming that the Bulls had a comparable team to Detroit in '88?

arguably the games greates player? bird wasn't even top 2 in 1988. the celtics lost because the piston's best player outplayed the celtics best player. thomas averaged 23.0ppg, 5.2rpg, 8.3apg, and 2.7spg. besides, bird's scoring output and shooting percentages didn't even have much of an effect on the outcome of games. in the only 2 wins the celtics had against the pistons he averaged 19 points on 37%.

Bird definitely had a case for best player in '88. An incredibly well rounded player who averaged 30/9/6 on shooting percentages of 53/41/92 and probably should have been voted MVP.

celtics better over 82 games

Right, because that always proves who the better team is. I forgot that Bird also shot just 35% over 82 games.

awesome, well rounded players who stepped up huge to pick up the slack with no mj. bj was an all-star, and grant a top 4 power forward.

I wouldn't call BJ an "awesome well rounded player". Haven't made a list for '94 yet, but I have some doubts about Grant being a top 4 PF. In fact, I know he wasn't. There was Malone, Barkley, Kemp and Coleman.

pippen didn't raise his game at all. with the greatest scorer in the game leaving, the second best scorer on the team needed to elevate his scoring more than anything else.

Revisionist history at it's finest.

how many good teams did they beat without grant in '94? you would imagine that bulls team in '95 to be around .500 anyway. especially with kukoc stepping up into a bigger role and averaging 16/5/5, along with bj's continued steady play.

Kukoc was playing out of position at PF, yet they were still an elite defensive team. Pippen's all around play was just unbelievable in '94 and '95.

pippen needed to be a 25 ppg scorer. superstars do what the team requires, when they require it.

Pippen did do what the team required, hence their 55-27 record, only 2 fewer wins than in '93 with Jordan. And they took the Eastern Conference champion Knicks to 7, and probably would have won the series if not for the ridiculous call by Hue Hollins. '91 Pippen doesn't have that team winning 50 games or contending for a championship.

the knicks had a better regular season, weren't a expansion team playing in its first ever playoff series. the knicks had patrick ewing who had a great regular season with 27/11/3/1/3. the heat lost the regular season series to the bulls 0-4 and averaging losing margin was over 17 points per game.

They were a 38-44 team, the Bulls demolition of the Knicks shows how much the Knicks were struggling as much as it shows how good the Bulls struggled.

the sixers were better than the knicks also. even tho the knicks won more games in the regular season, the sixers won 3 out of 4 regular season games against the bulls, whereas the knicks went a paltry 0-4 against the bulls in the '92 regular season.

the pistons were easily better than the cavs. they were the defending 2 time champion and the bulls bogey team..and to destroy them like they did..well nothing else really needs to be said here.

With a healthy Isiah, I might agree. With the Isiah Detroit had in the '91 playoffs, I'm not sure. The Cavs were extremely talented with great players like Daugherty, Price and Nance in addition to another excellent post scorer in Hot Rod Williams.

the lakers were also much better than the trailblazers coming off a decade of dominance and boasting the best point guard in the nba a top 3 small forward, a top 4 center, and a top 5 power forward.

So Vlade Divac was now a top 4 center in '91? Robinson, Ewing, Hakeem and Daugherty have something to say about that.

I liked Vlade, and Perkins for that matter, I doubt Sam was a top 5 PF too. Worthy wasn't a top 3 SF.

jordan was at his peak in '91 due to his playoff performance so that easily separated him from any other year. pippen was closer to his '91 self than jordan was, but still wasn't as good. the only player that was better in '92 was horace grant.

Pippen and Grant were clearly better in '92. It's not even close or debatable. Jordan's '91 season was very close to '90 and '92. The difference vs '90 was that Jordan had teammates who improved a lot, and he faced a Detroit team that was nowhere near as strong as '90. His level of play and skills were every bit as good in '90, and he had to do even more for that team.

both jordan and pippen had the better regular season in 1992, but once again, the playoffs were the difference. the bulls lost only 1 games, and jordan and pippen both played amazing ball.

Jordan's level of play in both the regular season and playoffs were comparable both years. Pippen had comparable playoff runs both years, but his regular season and overall skills and level of play were too much to make '91 even comparable.

And the '92 Bulls were clearly better than the '91 Bulls.

yeh what about their 12th best player julius nwosu in his 23 games was a nice impact player, he averaged 13 points and 10 rebounds per 36 minutes! why would you trade rodman for filth if he was of any worth to your team?

they thought Rodman was a cancer, and he didn't get along with Robinson. But you can't ignore a 40-9 record with him compared to just 22-11 without him. And Dennis went on to win 3 more titles after Chicago had just lost to Orlando.

oh ya, n don't forget about corey crowder and how well he played in his 7 games for the spurs.

Are you pretending that guys like Elliott, Rodman, Avery Johnson, Chuck Person and Del Negro, or Dale Ellis and Antoine Carr weren't quality players? Del Negro was the worst, but good for a role player.

[eliteballer]

shep either trolling, is stupid, or didnt actually watch ball back then by the stuff he's saying

[Round Mound]

Shep is a Jazz Fan and Hates It When People Give CLEAR Evidence on Barkley > Malone or Stockton-To-Malone.

Its a Fact that for 10-11 Years Barkley Outplayed and Owned Malone. Malone Got the Better on Barkley from 1995-96 On Cause of Injuries and Loosing the Potence, Agility, Quickness and Leaping Ability He Once Had. NEVER BEFORE

Fat Lever Better than Barkley? GTFO Lost Creability Right There

[D.J.]

Shep is just trolling. Fat Lever better than Barkley? I've heard it all.

[Shep]

That Sixer team didn't have particularly good offensive players outside of Barkley.

with stockton and sikma they would've had a much more potent offense with alot more options which in turn would be harder to defend.

And I'd rather have a far more skilled Barkley who wasn't a turnover machine.

how far did those skills get his teams?

Some players are good judges of players, but Pippen is more qualified than anyone to judge what his best season was.

he would've said '94 was his best season so people would think he was at his best when mj wasn't there which was hardly the case at all considering all the season's i've mentioned that he was better than he was in '94..all of those season's playing alongside jordan.

Teams have won titles with 3rd best players who weren't top 50. And I'm not sure Dantley was that low.

how many teams? i am certain he was the 48th best player in 1988.

Not in his prime except '93. He did have good rosters in his first 2 years(though Moses was injured in '86), and Phoenix and Houston. Too bad they didn't come earlier when he was at the top of his game. look what happened in the one prime year that he had a legit contending team in, he got all the way to the finals.

how can the second best year of his career not be included in his prime?

Disagree on Barkley. Not sure if I'd call Moses overrated, at times I thought so, but he was the best player in the league for 2 years in '82 and '83. And he led one of the great teams of all time with a 65-17 record and a 12-1 playoff record. I definitely don't see why Moses gets into some top 10 lists. He was probably the biggest black hole I've seen. I was surprised to see him constantly hold the ball instead of passing when doubled, and then go to a drop step or something and force up a shot against 2 men. That's probably why he had such a horrible assist/turnover ratio. And he didn't seem to be the defensive anchor that the other great centers were considering Houston was often among the worst defensive teams and at times were the worst or 2nd worst. Outside of '81 and '83, his playoff career was disappointing too, and he underachieved with incredibly talented rosters in '84 and '85 including a 1st round upset loss in '84. He was one of the all-time great rebounders and a very good scorer, though. Regardless, outside of the first tier top 5 centers(Kareem, Russell, Shaq, Hakeem, Wilt), I often wonder if he was really a more effective center than some of the other great centers.

lol moses malone wasn't even top 4 in '82, i agree with him being the best player in the nba in '83 tho. and outside that tier you mentioned still above malone on the all time center's list is david robinson, george mikan, and patrick ewing. he is, however, ranked higher than charles barkley .

Now I've heard it all. Barkley was in his prime in Houston? He hadn't been in his prime since '93!

so according to you his prime was from 1993 until 1993? that is the only plausible explanation here.

This is useless, are you really claiming that the Bulls had a comparable team to Detroit in '88?

they were the number 2 and number 3 seed in the eastern conference playoff picture. obviously they did have a comparable team to detroit to only win 4 less games than the pistons over an 82 game season.

Bird definitely had a case for best player in '88. An incredibly well rounded player who averaged 30/9/6 on shooting percentages of 53/41/92 and probably should have been voted MVP.

that was easily michael jordan's mvp. infact it was closer bird and fourth most valuable player clyde drexler than it was between bird and jordan.

Right, because that always proves who the better team is. I forgot that Bird also shot just 35% over 82 games.

yeh it usually proves who the better team is, and then its the players who step up the most is what determines how far a team gets in the playoffs.

I wouldn't call BJ an "awesome well rounded player". Haven't made a list for '94 yet, but I have some doubts about Grant being a top 4 PF. In fact, I know he wasn't. There was Malone, Barkley, Kemp and Coleman.

the playoff's proved grant was better than coleman (40%fg, 5topg, destroyed in the first round)

Revisionist history at it's finest.

Kukoc was playing out of position at PF, yet they were still an elite defensive team. Pippen's all around play was just unbelievable in '94 and '95.

not as unbelievable as in other years, especially 1991

Pippen did do what the team required, hence their 55-27 record, only 2 fewer wins than in '93 with Jordan. And they took the Eastern Conference champion Knicks to 7, and probably would have won the series if not for the ridiculous call by Hue Hollins. '91 Pippen doesn't have that team winning 50 games or contending for a championship.

'91 pippen probably wouldn't have pouted and they probably make the conference finals and puts up alot healthier numbers than the 21.7ppg, 7.7rpg, 4.7apg, 2.0spg, 0.6bpg, 3.3topg, and 41%fg he put up in the knicks series.

They were a 38-44 team, the Bulls demolition of the Knicks shows how much the Knicks were struggling as much as it shows how good the Bulls struggled.

the bulls turned the all-nba second team center into the most disappointing player of the entire playoffs. who was the heat's best player? rony seikaly?

With a healthy Isiah, I might agree. With the Isiah Detroit had in the '91 playoffs, I'm not sure. The Cavs were extremely talented with great players like Daugherty, Price and Nance in addition to another excellent post scorer in Hot Rod Williams.

talented, but not the defending 2 time nba champion

So Vlade Divac was now a top 4 center in '91? Robinson, Ewing, Hakeem and Daugherty have something to say about that.

daugherty wasn't better than divac. daugherty could barely break the .400 mark and did not participate in playoff action. meanwhile divac was the lakers third best player in the regular season and playoffs and averaged 18.2ppg, 8.8rpg, 2.0apg, 1.8spg, 2.4bpg, and 57%fg in the nba finals while daugherty was getting fat sitting on his couch watching.

I liked Vlade, and Perkins for that matter, I doubt Sam was a top 5 PF too. Worthy wasn't a top 3 SF.

they both were, no need for doubts here you can trust me

Pippen and Grant were clearly better in '92. It's not even close or debatable. Jordan's '91 season was very close to '90 and '92. The difference vs '90 was that Jordan had teammates who improved a lot, and he faced a Detroit team that was nowhere near as strong as '90. His level of play and skills were every bit as good in '90, and he had to do even more for that team.

grant was clearly better, the other two were better in 1991. jordan by a huge margin.

Jordan's level of play in both the regular season and playoffs were comparable both years. Pippen had comparable playoff runs both years, but his regular season and overall skills and level of play were too much to make '91 even comparable.

And the '92 Bulls were clearly better than the '91 Bulls.

jordan's playoff was easily better in 1991. as for pippen, his play in the playoff's proved that he was better in 1991 also.

they thought Rodman was a cancer, and he didn't get along with Robinson. But you can't ignore a 40-9 record with him compared to just 22-11 without him. And Dennis went on to win 3 more titles after Chicago had just lost to Orlando.

they won 59 games the next year after trading rodman for a bag of dirt robinson also went on to win 2 more titles

Are you pretending that guys like Elliott, Rodman, Avery Johnson, Chuck Person and Del Negro, or Dale Ellis and Antoine Carr weren't quality players? Del Negro was the worst, but good for a role player.

robinson's main teammates were proven to be d-league talent without him

[ShaqAttack3234]

with stockton and sikma they would've had a much more potent offense with alot more options which in turn would be harder to defend.

Except they'd still suck defensively. That's why they were a losing team. Stockton had just as many scorers in Utah, including a star player who was a perfect fit with him, and Utah was still a mediocre offensive team, and worse than Philly. They can thank Mark Eaton and the defense for their 47 wins.

how far did those skills get his teams?

Funny you mention it, Charles won almost as many games(53) with less talent than he did in '86, and he got just as far in the playoffs(second round). While being a better player, who put up much better numbers.

So '86 Barkley has absolutely no case over '90 Barkley based on level of play, team success and numbers, pretty much everything anyone would use to rank a player.

And '91 Barkley was right on par with '90 Barkley. He won less games partially because he played less. And you've said that games played aren't a factor in ranking players. The '91 Sixers were 39-28 with Barkley, a 48 win pace. And they were clearly worse than his '90 team because he had the same team on paper entering the season, but he pretty much lost Johnny Dawkins for the year(played 4 games), and Mike Gminski declined(13.7 ppg, 8.5 rpg, 45.7 FG% in '90 vs 9.1 ppg, 6.7 rpg, 38.4 FG%).

So Barkley clearly had less help, yet they were 19-11 with Gminski, a 52 win pace, right on par with '90 or '86, despite no Dawkins and Gminski playing like trash.

But they got worse with the Gminski for Gilliam trade because Gilliam didn't fit on the team. So the '91 Sixers were much worse than '90 and Barkley missed 15 games explaining the drop in wins.

But he still got just as far in the playoffs as he did in '90 or '86, making the second round.

There's no case for his '86 season over '90 or '91.

he would've said '94 was his best season so people would think he was at his best when mj wasn't there which was hardly the case at all considering all the season's i've mentioned that he was better than he was in '94..all of those season's playing alongside jordan.

Nice theory, except pretty much everyone said it, and the people who didn't chose '95 or '96 as his best....except you apparently.

how many teams? i am certain he was the 48th best player in 1988.

I don't have top 50 rankings, but probably the '91 Bulls. The only year that I'm pretty sure Grant would make top 50 is '92. I'm unsure about '93.

After Hakeem and Thorpe, who could make top 50 on the '94 Rockets? And Horry played the best ball of his career in the '95 playoffs, but I'm not sure he was at a top 50 level.

I don't see a 3rd best player on the '99 Spurs who is top 50. Neither Avery Johnson or Sean Elliott seem good enough in that stage of their career.

I'm positive that the 3 Laker championship teams from '00-'02 didn't have a 3rd best player who was top 50.

I'm not sure the '03 Spurs did either. The '06 Heat didn't.

how can the second best year of his career not be included in his prime?

Because it's not even remotely close to the second best year of his career.

lol moses malone wasn't even top 4 in '82, i agree with him being the best player in the nba in '83 tho. and outside that tier you mentioned still above malone on the all time center's list is david robinson, george mikan, and patrick ewing. he is, however, ranked higher than charles barkley

.

I'd give Moses best player in '82 because there doesn't seem to be anyone else. Kareem was a bit past his prime, though I'm not fully convinced Moses was better yet. Bird had some injuries that affected his play, I believe inthe season and playoffs and he wasn't really in his prime yet.

Dr. J didn't seem to have lost that much, but probably wasn't at his best anymore, and we saw that Moses was clearly better the next year when they played together.

It's tough having not seen an '82 Rockets game, I just have an idea of how Moses played from his other prime years, and have read a bit about his '82 season. I know he had a disappointing playoff series.

He seems to be the best by default.

so according to you his prime was from 1993 until 1993? that is the only plausible explanation here.

His prime clearly started in '88 or '89 and ended after '93.

they were the number 2 and number 3 seed in the eastern conference playoff picture. obviously they did have a comparable team to detroit to only win 4 less games than the pistons over an 82 game season.

that was easily michael jordan's mvp. infact it was closer bird and fourth most valuable player clyde drexler than it was between bird and jordan.

at Bird being closer to Drexler.

Bird definitely had a case over Jordan for MVP. He had a better team, but won 7 more games, and had Boston not rested their best players like Bird and McHale in the last couple of games, they probably win 59 games and keep the Bulls at 49 wins.

Bird was a better passer, and a more mature and unselfish player who was playing a style that seemed to fit better with talent and had a great impact on his teammates than Jordan.

He was getting 9 rpg, a less ball-dominant forward who averaged more assists than Jordan and still averaged 30 ppg with an unbelievable shooting season of 53/41/92. And I'm sure Bird could have scored more had he wanted to/had to.

Jordan was less polished in '88 and not nearly as smart or fundamentally sound defensively so the difference wasn't as great as it'd be later.

Both had a legitimate case for best player and MVP.

yeh it usually proves who the better team is, and then its the players who step up the most is what determines how far a team gets in the playoffs.

Many teams, especially contenders don't go all out in the playoffs.

the playoff's proved grant was better than coleman (40%fg, 5topg, destroyed in the first round)

You really love putting 3rd option types over stars, don't you?

not as unbelievable as in other years, especially 1991

'91 pippen probably wouldn't have pouted and they probably make the conference finals and puts up alot healthier numbers than the 21.7ppg, 7.7rpg, 4.7apg, 2.0spg, 0.6bpg, 3.3topg, and 41%fg he put up in the knicks series.

The part about '91 Pippen not pouting is based on nothing. '91 Pippen wasn't the primary focus of opposing defenses and he never faced a defensive team anything like the '94 Knicks who arguably had the toughest defense ever.

The numbers you listed are fine. Shooting % is a bit low, but consider the opponent. He was one horrendous call from taking a 3-2 lead back to Chicago.

'91 Pippen would have to worry about making the playoffs with the '94 team, and he isn't getting out of the first round.

the bulls turned the all-nba second team center into the most disappointing player of the entire playoffs. who was the heat's best player? rony seikaly?

Do you only judge teams by their best player? Miami also had Glen Rice. Who did the Knicks have around Ewing.

talented, but not the defending 2 time nba champion

And Detroit wasn't at that level by '91 anymore. It was the end of an era, the Knicks knocked them out in the 1st round just the next season.

daugherty wasn't better than divac. daugherty could barely break the .400 mark and did not participate in playoff action. meanwhile divac was the lakers third best player in the regular season and playoffs and averaged 18.2ppg, 8.8rpg, 2.0apg, 1.8spg, 2.4bpg, and 57%fg in the nba finals while daugherty was getting fat sitting on his couch watching.

at comparing team success between a player who was the 4th or 5th best player on his team to a star player.

grant was clearly better, the other two were better in 1991. jordan by a huge margin.

There is really no way to argue that Pippen was better in '91 than '92. There's no way to argue that Pippen was better in '91 than any year from '92-'97.

And there was never a huge margin separating any of Jordan's 3 years from '90-'92, and not a huge difference separating any of his prime years from '89-'93 for that matter.

jordan's playoff was easily better in 1991. as for pippen, his play in the playoff's proved that he was better in 1991 also.

they won 59 games the next year after trading rodman for a bag of dirt robinson also went on to win 2 more titles

Worse team than with Rodman, and they failed to make it back to the conference finals.

robinson's main teammates were proven to be d-league talent without him

Wow, the D-League is better than I thought, I have to start watching it. Thanks!

[Shep]

Except they'd still suck defensively. That's why they were a losing team. Stockton had just as many scorers in Utah, including a star player who was a perfect fit with him, and Utah was still a mediocre offensive team, and worse than Philly. They can thank Mark Eaton and the defense for their 47 wins.

utah had nowhere near as many scorers. stockton was a perfect fit for malone because he had the type of unselfish game that would suit playing alongside anyone offensive minded and would only made them a better player because of it. stockton attempted less than 10 field goals per game and scored almost 15 points, and shot at 57% from the field, best among point guards and fourth in the entire league. the jazz still remained one of the best defensive teams in the nba once eaton had been rendered useless a couple of years later.

Funny you mention it, Charles won almost as many games(53) with less talent than he did in '86, and he got just as far in the playoffs(second round). While being a better player, who put up much better numbers.

So '86 Barkley has absolutely no case over '90 Barkley based on level of play, team success and numbers, pretty much everything anyone would use to rank a player.

1990 was barkley's third best year in the nba, and it was relatively close, but if you looked into it it becomes clear.
i will give you the barkley's regular season in 1990 over his in 1986, but only by the smallest of amounts. but then you have to look into what happened in the playoffs.
barkley in the 1986 playoffs:
team record: 6-5
playoff production: 25.0ppg, 15.8rpg, 5.6apg, 2.3spg, 1.3bpg, 58%fg

took the powerful 57 win milwaukee bucks to a 7th game on their home floor that went down to the wire (113-112), all without moses malone and his 24/12, who missed the entire playoffs.

barkley in the 1990 playoffs:
team record: 4-6 (barely scrape past the cavaliers (gets outscored by hersey hawkins for the series), destroyed in the second round).

the sixers required a huge series clinching game 5 against 7th seed cleveland from hersey hawkins who had 39 points meanwhile barkley finished with only 18 on 7/15 fg.

playoff production: 24.7ppg, 15.5rpg, 4.3apg, 0.8spg, 0.7bpg, 54%fg

in 1986 he stepped up the most out of anyone on his team, in 1990 hersey hawkins stepped up more, as did johnney dawkins.

with all this in mind it is and easy decision to make - 1986 barkley was clearly the better player than 1990 barkley.

And '91 Barkley was right on par with '90 Barkley. He won less games partially because he played less. And you've said that games played aren't a factor in ranking players. The '91 Sixers were 39-28 with Barkley, a 48 win pace. And they were clearly worse than his '90 team because he had the same team on paper entering the season, but he pretty much lost Johnny Dawkins for the year(played 4 games), and Mike Gminski declined(13.7 ppg, 8.5 rpg, 45.7 FG% in '90 vs 9.1 ppg, 6.7 rpg, 38.4 FG%).

So Barkley clearly had less help, yet they were 19-11 with Gminski, a 52 win pace, right on par with '90 or '86, despite no Dawkins and Gminski playing like trash.

But they got worse with the Gminski for Gilliam trade because Gilliam didn't fit on the team. So the '91 Sixers were much worse than '90 and Barkley missed 15 games explaining the drop in wins.

But he still got just as far in the playoffs as he did in '90 or '86, making the second round.

There's no case for his '86 season over '90 or '91.

i don't use missed games, but i also don't use the record with them/without them due to the fact that he should be out on the court at all times for his team, so if the team does not so well without them then he will be also held accountable for this.

it is very close between barkley in 1990 and 1991. in 1990 he was better in the regular season, but in 1991 he was better in the playoffs. overall he was better in 1990 due to his very strong regular season. hersey hawkins also elevated his game huge in 1991 and was the third best shooting guard in the nba, only behind jordan and drexler. gilliam came in and provided some spark, and overall i'd say they had a slightly deeper team with the likes of mahorn, anderson, green, turner, and bol.

Nice theory, except pretty much everyone said it, and the people who didn't chose '95 or '96 as his best....except you apparently.

don't care what everyone says

I don't have top 50 rankings

well i'm not going to discuss this if you don't have a list to back up your statements.

Because it's not even remotely close to the second best year of his career.

I'd give Moses best player in '82 because there doesn't seem to be anyone else. Kareem was a bit past his prime, though I'm not fully convinced Moses was better yet. Bird had some injuries that affected his play, I believe inthe season and playoffs and he wasn't really in his prime yet.

Dr. J didn't seem to have lost that much, but probably wasn't at his best anymore, and we saw that Moses was clearly better the next year when they played together.

It's tough having not seen an '82 Rockets game, I just have an idea of how Moses played from his other prime years, and have read a bit about his '82 season. I know he had a disappointing playoff series.

He seems to be the best by default.

better players than moses malone in 1982 were magic johnson, kareem abdul-jabbar, larry bird, and julius erving.

His prime clearly started in '88 or '89 and ended after '93.

but his peak 2 season's were 1993, then 1986

at Bird being closer to Drexler.

at bird being close to jordan

Bird definitely had a case over Jordan for MVP. He had a better team, but won 7 more games, and had Boston not rested their best players like Bird and McHale in the last couple of games, they probably win 59 games and keep the Bulls at 49 wins.

Bird was a better passer, and a more mature and unselfish player who was playing a style that seemed to fit better with talent and had a great impact on his teammates than Jordan.

He was getting 9 rpg, a less ball-dominant forward who averaged more assists than Jordan and still averaged 30 ppg with an unbelievable shooting season of 53/41/92. And I'm sure Bird could have scored more had he wanted to/had to.

Jordan was less polished in '88 and not nearly as smart or fundamentally sound defensively so the difference wasn't as great as it'd be later.

Both had a legitimate case for best player and MVP.

jordan had the bulls improved 10 games from the season prior with more or less the same roster, played all 82 games, and averaged 35.0ppg, 5.5rpg, 5.9apg, 3.2spg, 1.6bpg, on 54%fg and won 50 games. his second best player probably wasn't in the top 10 at his position. jordan was named defensive player of the year, and led the league in minutes played, field goals, free throws, steals, and points.

Many teams, especially contenders don't go all out in the playoffs.

You really love putting 3rd option types over stars, don't you?

just as much as you love putting losers over winners

The part about '91 Pippen not pouting is based on nothing. '91 Pippen wasn't the primary focus of opposing defenses and he never faced a defensive team anything like the '94 Knicks who arguably had the toughest defense ever.

The numbers you listed are fine. Shooting % is a bit low, but consider the opponent. He was one horrendous call from taking a 3-2 lead back to Chicago.

'91 Pippen would have to worry about making the playoffs with the '94 team, and he isn't getting out of the first round.

'91 pippen would definately step up in the playoffs rather than step down and increase his level of productivity and do what the team needed him to do to be successful. '91 pippen was better than anyone in the '94 league not named hakeem and they more than likely make it back to the finals.

Do you only judge teams by their best player? Miami also had Glen Rice. Who did the Knicks have around Ewing.

no, but i'd definately rather face a franchise playing in its first ever playoff series than a guy coming off a top 6 season. the knicks also had tough seasoned veteran's such as charles oakley, maurice cheeks, and gerald wilkins.

And Detroit wasn't at that level by '91 anymore. It was the end of an era, the Knicks knocked them out in the 1st round just the next season.

the 1991 bulls officially ended that era

at comparing team success between a player who was the 4th or 5th best player on his team to a star player.

divac was actually the third best player on the lakers in the regular season and the playoffs. daugherty could only dream about putting up those numbers in the playoffs..instead he didn't even make them

There is really no way to argue that Pippen was better in '91 than '92. There's no way to argue that Pippen was better in '91 than any year from '92-'97.

i've already destroyed this about 10 times

And there was never a huge margin separating any of Jordan's 3 years from '90-'92, and not a huge difference separating any of his prime years from '89-'93 for that matter.

see above

Worse team than with Rodman, and they failed to make it back to the conference finals.

so the difference between rodman and perdue is 3 wins

Wow, the D-League is better than I thought, I have to start watching it. Thanks!

not really, it is filled with filth. but put any of those guys on a roster with prime robinson and he would make it work.

[ShaqAttack3234]

utah had nowhere near as many scorers. stockton was a perfect fit for malone because he had the type of unselfish game that would suit playing alongside anyone offensive minded and would only made them a better player because of it. stockton attempted less than 10 field goals per game and scored almost 15 points, and shot at 57% from the field, best among point guards and fourth in the entire league. the jazz still remained one of the best defensive teams in the nba once eaton had been rendered useless a couple of years later.

Utah had 4-5 scorers outside of Stockton, one of them being a superstar and one of the league's top scorers, the other Thurl Bailey being a better scorer than any of Barkley's teammates.

And Utah's defense did decline significantly after Eaton declined, though they remained good, until '93.

1990 was barkley's third best year in the nba, and it was relatively close, but if you looked into it it becomes clear.
i will give you the barkley's regular season in 1990 over his in 1986, but only by the smallest of amounts.

I don't see it as remotely close, but at least we're on the same page about which is the better regular season.

but then you have to look into what happened in the playoffs.

The Cavs being a 7th seed is deceptive. Daugherty missed 41 games and Nance missed 20. With those 2 healthy, as they were in the playoffs in addition to Price, Williams and Ehlo, that's easily a 50+ win team, and more talented than the Sixers. Much more formidable than the '86 Bullets.

regarding game 5 vs the Cavs, Barkley also had 19 rebounds, and I've seen that game, he played well.

As far as the Milwaukee series, their best player Sidney Moncrief only played 3 games in the series, and Milwaukee won all 3 of the games that Moncrief played, so that also takes away from how impressive taking the Bucks to 7 was.

I have been critical of Barkley for not tying the series 2-2 with Pippen out for a game 4 in Phildelphia, particularly since Barkley didn't play that well in the series outside of game 1 and 3, and I thought the Bulls and Sixers had pretty comparable rosters to begin with. But I can't be too critical considering prime/peak Jordan was playing flawless basketball, as well as an individual can play.

with all this in mind it is and easy decision to make - 1986 barkley was clearly the better player than 1990 barkley.

I don't see how 10-11 games would be enough to overcome the clearly superior regular season. I'm not denying that his '86 playoff run was better, I can't say for sure having seen more '90 games than '86 playoff games, but the numbers are very close, and that's with a faster pace in '86.

i don't use missed games, but i also don't use the record with them/without them due to the fact that he should be out on the court at all times for his team, so if the team does not so well without them then he will be also held accountable for this.

This doesn't make sense to me because injuries happen, and you can't play through them all. I don't think Barkley is helping his team by playing when limited instead of letting the injury heal so he can be 100% in the playoffs.

Plus, seeing the team have twice as many losses as wins when he was out, and then a very respectable record with him shows how much of a positive impact Charles made on his team.

it is very close between barkley in 1990 and 1991. in 1990 he was better in the regular season, but in 1991 he was better in the playoffs. overall he was better in 1990 due to his very strong regular season. hersey hawkins also elevated his game huge in 1991 and was the third best shooting guard in the nba, only behind jordan and drexler. gilliam came in and provided some spark, and overall i'd say they had a slightly deeper team with the likes of mahorn, anderson, green, turner, and bol.

I can agree with your reasoning, and probably would lean towards '90 over '91 as well. Also because he just impressed me more watching '90 Barkley games vs '91 games. But there's no doubt in my mind that his '91 team was worse.

better players than moses malone in 1982 were magic johnson, kareem abdul-jabbar, larry bird, and julius erving.

Kareem and Bird do have a case, so I can't really argue with either, but Moses did seem to be the dominant player of the year.

Magic definitely wasn't as good as Moses yet, though. He had not added his outside shot or post game, 2 things which made him a really good half court player, but in '82, he still relied on transition opportunities, which is why he's below these other 4.

but his peak 2 season's were 1993, then 1986

'93 has a case for being his best season, I think I could make a solid case for that. It's tough to separate his years from '89-'93, his level of play was remarkably consistent with the exception of '92. His 2 peak seasons are somewhere there. '88 isn't that far behind.

jordan had the bulls improved 10 games from the season prior with more or less the same roster, played all 82 games, and averaged 35.0ppg, 5.5rpg, 5.9apg, 3.2spg, 1.6bpg, on 54%fg and won 50 games. his second best player probably wasn't in the top 10 at his position. jordan was named defensive player of the year, and led the league in minutes played, field goals, free throws, steals, and points.

Jordan had a tremendous season, but so did Bird.

Jordan was probably the more dominant and explosive scorer by that point, bur Bird averaged 30 points himself. And he did so on as amazing of a shooting season as you'll see. 53% from the field, 41% on 3s and 92% from the line.

Bird played better without the ball at that point, he was the better shooter from all areas, was crafty in the post and a more effective post player at that point and was scoring in a role where he had to fit in more with all of the other weapons on the team instead of being the team.

Bird was also the best rebounder at his position. He averaged 9 boards while playing with Robert Parish, who averaged 12.5 rpg the next season without Bird, and Kevin McHale, who was a solid rebounding power forward.

And Bird was not only the best passer at his position by far, but one of the best passers in the league. Outside of Magic, and maybe Stockton, who else could you say was a better passer. Bird averaged more assists as a forward with a less ball-dominant role than Jordan did as a guard.

It's close, I'm not arguing that Bird was better, just that it's close, because I'm not sure who I'd choose yet. But I can see a teamhaving a better chance to win a title with Bird than Jordan at that point in their careers.

Larry also won 57 games, and probably would have won 59 if Bird and other starters didn't rest/sit out on the last 2 games which meant nothing. And without his second best player Kevin McHale, Bird led the Celtics to a 10-3 record, and a 9-2 record excluding the games Bird played limited minutes in.

'91 pippen would definately step up in the playoffs rather than step down and increase his level of productivity and do what the team needed him to do to be successful. '91 pippen was better than anyone in the '94 league not named hakeem and they more than likely make it back to the finals.

'94 Pippen was arguably the second best player in the league. I'm laughing at the thought of '91 Pippen as the primary focus of the legendary '94 Knicks defense. Not that he'd have probably gotten to the second round in the 1st place.

no, but i'd definately rather face a franchise playing in its first ever playoff series than a guy coming off a top 6 season. the knicks also had tough seasoned veteran's such as charles oakley, maurice cheeks, and gerald wilkins.

Both were poor teams, no matter how good Ewing was. the Knicks were a 39-43 team and Miami were a 38-44 team, both teams were swept.

the 1991 bulls officially ended that era

Yeah, and it helped that Isiah was injured throughout the year and Detroit had gone from 63 wins in '89 and 59 in '90 to just 50 in '91. And then a 48 win team that lost in the 1st round in '92.

divac was actually the third best player on the lakers in the regular season and the playoffs. daugherty could only dream about putting up those numbers in the playoffs..instead he didn't even make them

Are you serious? Daugherty could only dream of putting up 13.3 ppg, 6.7 rpg, 1.1 apg, 2.2 TO, 2.2 bpg, 1.4 spg, 56.4 FG%? Vlade did that in 19 games, just the next season, Daugherty put up 21.5 ppg, 10.2 rpg, 3.4 apg, 2.2 TO, 1 bpg, 52.8 FG% absolutely destroying Vlade's numbers from '91.

so the difference between rodman and perdue is 3 wins

Not at all. The Spurs were on a phenomenal 67 win pace with Rodman in '95 at 40-9, and just a 55 win pace without him at 22-11. They lost 2 more games in 16 fewer games. He made the all-nba 3rd team while playing just 49 games.

not really, it is filled with filth. but put any of those guys on a roster with prime robinson and he would make it work.

When Robinson went down for the final 14 games of the '92 season, Elliott raised his game to 18 ppg on 49% shooting 20 ppg on 48% in the playoffs. Cummings and Carr raised their games as much in that or much more in Cummings case. Strickland kept up his solid play.

So it doesn't look like any of his best players on the '92 team, including Elliott, struggled to produce without him.

[fpliii]

nothing to contribute, but this is a ridiculous back and forth

so fvcking intense here, holy sh*t

[Shep]

Utah had 4-5 scorers outside of Stockton, one of them being a superstar and one of the league's top scorers, the other Thurl Bailey being a better scorer than any of Barkley's teammates.

And Utah's defense did decline significantly after Eaton declined, though they remained good, until '93.

4 out of 5 guys were averaging 15 points. any one of the 4 could step up and score 25 on any given night.

eaton was a non factor from 1990 onwards and they still won 55+ games

I don't see it as remotely close, but at least we're on the same page about which is the better regular season.

only by the smallest of amounts tho

The Cavs being a 7th seed is deceptive. Daugherty missed 41 games and Nance missed 20. With those 2 healthy, as they were in the playoffs in addition to Price, Williams and Ehlo, that's easily a 50+ win team, and more talented than the Sixers. Much more formidable than the '86 Bullets.

the main reason the cavaliers struggled so much during the regular season was because they traded away a top 2 shooting guard in ron harper for filth. daugherty and price were nice players, but this wasn't a powerful team by any stretch of the imagination, especially with the fact that they hadn't been together all year with people missing time due to injury.
daugherty and nance were average all season long, and nance played even worse in that series, dipping to 12 points and 5 rebounds per game. price was consistant, but even he wasn't top 5 at his position.

the bullets were one of the best defenses in the league and althought they might not have had the talent that cleveland did, what they did do was every player played out of their skins to take those sixers to 5 games.

manute bol went from 3.7ppg, 6.0rpg, 0.3apg, 0.4spg, 5.0bpg
to 4.6ppg, 7.6rpg, 0.2apg, 0.6spg, 5.8bpg

gus williams went from 13.5ppg, 2.2rpg, 5.9apg, 1.2spg, 0.2bpg
to 18.2ppg, 2.0rpg, 6.6apg, 2.2spg, 0.0bpg

cliff robinson went from 18.7ppg, 8.7rpg, 2.4apg, 1.3spg, 0.6bpg
to 21.4ppg, 8.6rpg, 3.4apg, 2.0spg, 0.6bpg

jeff malone went from 22.4ppg, 3.6rpg, 2.4apg, 0.9spg, 0.2bpg
to 22.0ppg, 3.2rpg, 3.4apg, 1.4spg, 0.6bpg

dan roundfield went from 11.6ppg, 8.1rpg, 2.1apg, 0.5spg, 0.6bpg
to 14.0ppg, 9.2rpg, 2.0apg, 0.4spg, 0.8bpg

regarding game 5 vs the Cavs, Barkley also had 19 rebounds, and I've seen that game, he played well.

hawkins played better, and played more like a star player. 39/4/2/4 14/26 fg 4/6 3p 7/8 ft. barkley 7/15 fg 0/3 3p 4/7 ft.

As far as the Milwaukee series, their best player Sidney Moncrief only played 3 games in the series, and Milwaukee won all 3 of the games that Moncrief played, so that also takes away from how impressive taking the Bucks to 7 was.

pressey and cummings were the bucks two best players and they were there for all 7 games.

I don't see how 10-11 games would be enough to overcome the clearly superior regular season. I'm not denying that his '86 playoff run was better, I can't say for sure having seen more '90 games than '86 playoff games, but the numbers are very close, and that's with a faster pace in '86.

pace is already taken into consideration here. and 12 playoff games are enough to overcome a regular season in this case due to:
1. the regular season being almost inseparable, and
2. his 1986 playoff's being easily superior

This doesn't make sense to me because injuries happen, and you can't play through them all. I don't think Barkley is helping his team by playing when limited instead of letting the injury heal so he can be 100% in the playoffs.

injuries happen, but players who miss more games than players who don't miss games are less valuable to their respective teams.

Plus, seeing the team have twice as many losses as wins when he was out, and then a very respectable record with him shows how much of a positive impact Charles made on his team.

so he holds more responsibility for the losses

Kareem and Bird do have a case, so I can't really argue with either, but Moses did seem to be the dominant player of the year.

Magic definitely wasn't as good as Moses yet, though. He had not added his outside shot or post game, 2 things which made him a really good half court player, but in '82, he still relied on transition opportunities, which is why he's below these other 4.

magic johnson led the lakers to second best record in the nba and championship, where he also won finals most valuable player. magic led the lakers to a 12-2 playoff record, and stepped up the most out of all players who participated in the playoffs averaging close to a triple double with 17.4ppg, 11.3rpg, 9.3apg, 2.9spg, on 53%fg and 83%ft after completing a regular season with averages of 18.6ppg, 9.6rpg, 9.5apg, 2.7spg on 54%fg and 76%ft.

'93 has a case for being his best season, I think I could make a solid case for that. It's tough to separate his years from '89-'93, his level of play was remarkably consistent with the exception of '92. His 2 peak seasons are somewhere there. '88 isn't that far behind.

1993 was his peak by a huge margin. followed by 1995, 1986, 1994, 1990, 1991, 1997, 1987, 1988, and 1996.

[Shep]

Jordan had a tremendous season, but so did Bird.

Jordan was probably the more dominant and explosive scorer by that point, bur Bird averaged 30 points himself. And he did so on as amazing of a shooting season as you'll see. 53% from the field, 41% on 3s and 92% from the line.

Bird played better without the ball at that point, he was the better shooter from all areas, was crafty in the post and a more effective post player at that point and was scoring in a role where he had to fit in more with all of the other weapons on the team instead of being the team.

Bird was also the best rebounder at his position. He averaged 9 boards while playing with Robert Parish, who averaged 12.5 rpg the next season without Bird, and Kevin McHale, who was a solid rebounding power forward.

And Bird was not only the best passer at his position by far, but one of the best passers in the league. Outside of Magic, and maybe Stockton, who else could you say was a better passer. Bird averaged more assists as a forward with a less ball-dominant role than Jordan did as a guard.

It's close, I'm not arguing that Bird was better, just that it's close, because I'm not sure who I'd choose yet. But I can see a teamhaving a better chance to win a title with Bird than Jordan at that point in their careers.

Larry also won 57 games, and probably would have won 59 if Bird and other starters didn't rest/sit out on the last 2 games which meant nothing. And without his second best player Kevin McHale, Bird led the Celtics to a 10-3 record, and a 9-2 record excluding the games Bird played limited minutes in.

larry bird was playing alongside 3 other hall of famers beside himself (including a top 2 power forward), where as jordan's next best teammate's consisted of a top 8 power forward, and dave corzine, yet the bulls still managed to only win 7 less games than the mighty celtics with a good enough record for third in the east. jordan also did not need to rest/sit out games.

jordan was the best offensive player in the league, and the best defensive player in the league. he led the bulls in points(almost tripling the second best scorers average), assists, minutes, steals, blocks, field goal percentage, and free throw percentage. there was no team that relied on 1 player more in the league..maybe even all time.

'94 Pippen was arguably the second best player in the league. I'm laughing at the thought of '91 Pippen as the primary focus of the legendary '94 Knicks defense. Not that he'd have probably gotten to the second round in the 1st place.

pippen wasn't even top 4 in '94. 1991 pippen averaged 22.0ppg, 7.8rpg, 5.3apg, 3.0spg, 2.0bpg, 48%fg against the great defense of detroit in 1991. with the ball in his hands alot more i can see him easily scoring atleast 5 more points per game.

Both were poor teams, no matter how good Ewing was. the Knicks were a 39-43 team and Miami were a 38-44 team, both teams were swept.

the knicks were a tougher matchup for the bulls

Yeah, and it helped that Isiah was injured throughout the year and Detroit had gone from 63 wins in '89 and 59 in '90 to just 50 in '91. And then a 48 win team that lost in the 1st round in '92.

who cares what happened in 1992? we saw detroit win consecutive championships and then get swept out of the playoff's the next season by the chicago bulls with its 2 best players at their respective peaks.

Are you serious? Daugherty could only dream of putting up 13.3 ppg, 6.7 rpg, 1.1 apg, 2.2 TO, 2.2 bpg, 1.4 spg, 56.4 FG%? Vlade did that in 19 games, just the next season, Daugherty put up 21.5 ppg, 10.2 rpg, 3.4 apg, 2.2 TO, 1 bpg, 52.8 FG% absolutely destroying Vlade's numbers from '91.

we were talking about divac's performance in the finals. saving the best for last and stepping up the most against the best competition, divac averaged 18.2ppg, 8.8rpg, 2.0apg, 1.8spg, and 2.4bpg, on 57%fg

Not at all. The Spurs were on a phenomenal 67 win pace with Rodman in '95 at 40-9, and just a 55 win pace without him at 22-11. They lost 2 more games in 16 fewer games. He made the all-nba 3rd team while playing just 49 games.

lol@that all nba team selection. give me vin baker and larry johnson on my third team easily over rodman, not to mention countless others. the wins amounted to nothing and they'd rather have a bag of dirt rather than him, proving his real worth to that franchise.

When Robinson went down for the final 14 games of the '92 season, Elliott raised his game to 18 ppg on 49% shooting 20 ppg on 48% in the playoffs. Cummings and Carr raised their games as much in that or much more in Cummings case. Strickland kept up his solid play.

So it doesn't look like any of his best players on the '92 team, including Elliott, struggled to produce without him.

5-9 over those games. give me a bigger sample size, like hmm..maybe 82 games in for example 1994 tho? how did elliott fare this time around.

[Dragonyeuw]

you forgot the other 5 that were also better than barkley: john stockton, isiah thomas, fat lever, james worthy, and dominique wilkins.

The things I read on this board.....

[willds09]

barkley needs to shut tha fuhk up